Dentists Warn Of Harmful ‘Mask Mouth’ Disease

Periodontal disease caused by extended wearing of face masks is just one more health problem to add to the growing list of adverse effects. This can lead to strokes and increased risk of heart attacks. ⁃ TN Editor

Some bad breath just can’t be covered up.

Now that dentists have reopened their doors, they’re having patients show up with a nasty set of symptoms, which the doctors have dubbed “mask mouth.”

The new oral hygiene issue — caused by, you guessed it, wearing a mask all the time to prevent the spread of the coronavirus — is leading to all kinds of dental disasters like decaying teeth, receding gum lines and seriously sour breath.

“We’re seeing inflammation in people’s gums that have been healthy forever, and cavities in people who have never had them before,” says Dr. Rob Ramondi, a dentist and co-founder of One Manhattan Dental. “About 50% of our patients are being impacted by this, [so] we decided to name it ‘mask mouth’ — after ‘meth mouth.’ ”

The term “meth mouth” is widely used by dentists to describe the dental problems that arise among methamphetamine users. Addicts often end up with cracked, black- and brown-stained teeth because the stimulant causes sugar cravings, teeth grinding and jaw clenching. They also often neglect their oral hygiene.

While mask mouth isn’t quite as obvious, if left untreated, the results could be equally harmful.

“Gum disease — or periodontal disease — will eventually lead to strokes and an increased risk of heart attacks,” says Dr. Marc Sclafani, another co-founder of One Manhattan Dental.

He says the stinky syndrome is triggered by face coverings, since wearing a mask increases dryness of the mouth — and a buildup of bad bacteria.

“People tend to breathe through their mouth instead of through their nose while wearing a mask,” says Sclafani. “The mouth breathing is causing the dry mouth, which leads to a decrease in saliva — and saliva is what fights the bacteria and cleanses your teeth.”

Read full story here…

Dying Alone: Technocrats Drive Heartless, Anti-Human Outcomes

The mind of a Technocrat doesn’t see human life as anything sacred, so it is easy for them to let people die alone as patients and families are left in a state of abject horror. As stated many times, Technocracy is anti-human at its core. ⁃ TN Editor

It’s a horrifying thought, not being able to see your loved one before they pass away. The sad truth of 2020 is that’s what’s happening all over the United States. A recent study finds a dramatic shift in where Americans are spending their final moments. Patients with COVID-19 this year are 12 times more likely to die in a medical facility than patients dying of any cause in 2018. Researchers add that many of these patients are tragically dying alone.

“Where you die is important and reflects end-of-life quality for the patient and the family,” says Northwestern University’s Dr. Sadiya Khan in a media release.

Due to quarantine restrictions during the pandemic, many people have not been able to visit family members in U.S. hospitals. Khan explains this is not just damaging for the patient, but for their loved ones too.

“A loved one dying alone takes a huge mental toll on families,” adds Khan, an assistant professor of preventive medicine in epidemiology. “It impairs the family’s ability to grieve and cope with the loss. For patients, we’ve all thought about how terrible it would be to have to die alone. This is the horror happening to thousands of people in medical facilities where no family member or loved one is able to be present with them during their final moments on earth.”

COVID-19 is taking people away from their homes

Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Northwestern team finds the vast majority of patients dying of coronavirus are not able to spend their final moments in the peace of their own homes.

From Feb. 1 through May 23, a staggering 91 percent of all COVID-19 deaths occurred in a medical facility or nursing home. Just 5.2 percent of Americans with the virus died at home. Under two percent passed away in hospice care.

This is a seismic shift from where people were passing just two years ago. During the same period in 2018, only 35.7 percent of Americans dying from all causes died in a hospital. Home deaths nearly equaled this total, with 31.1 percent of people spending their last moments in their residence.

For some states, the shifts are even more pronounced. Researchers say Minnesota nursing home deaths due to COVID-19 are up to 60 percent. The study urges states with highly vulnerable populations to keep using PPE (personal protection equipment).

“It’s especially important as nursing homes are reopening to visitors and may be exposing residents, especially in areas where there are increasing rates of cases,” Khan explains.

Read full story here…

Europe’s Top Health Officials Say Masks Aren’t Helpful in Beating COVID-19

Across the globe, doctors and top health officials are blowing the whistle on face masks as being effective against the coronavirus. The Technocrats in charge of the public narrative shun, denigrate and ridicule the professionals who are unafraid of speaking their mind. ⁃ TN Editor

Denmark boasts one of the lowest COVID-19 death rates in the world. As of August 4, the Danes have suffered 616 COVID-19 deaths, according to figures from Johns Hopkins University.

That’s less than one-third of the number of Danes who die from pneumonia or influenza in a given year.

Despite this success, Danish leaders recently found themselves on the defensive. The reason is that Danes aren’t wearing face masks, and local authorities for the most part aren’t even recommending them.

This prompted Berlingske, the country’s oldest newspaper, to complain that Danes had positioned themselves “to the right of Trump.”

“The whole world is wearing face masks, even Donald Trump,” Berlingske pointed out.

This apparently did not sit well with Danish health officials. They responded by noting there is little conclusive evidence that face masks are an effective way to limit the spread of respiratory viruses.

“All these countries recommending face masks haven’t made their decisions based on new studies,” said Henning Bundgaard, chief physician at Denmark’s Rigshospitale, according to Bloomberg News. (Denmark has since updated its guidelines to encourage, but not require, the use of masks on public transit where social distancing may not be possible.)

Denmark is not alone.

Despite a global stampede of mask-wearing, data show that 80-90 percent of people in Finland and Holland say they “never” wear masks when they go out, a sharp contrast to the 80-90 percent of people in Spain and Italy who say they “always” wear masks when they go out.

Dutch public health officials recently explained why they’re not recommending masks.

“From a medical point of view, there is no evidence of a medical effect of wearing face masks, so we decided not to impose a national obligation,” said Medical Care Minister Tamara van Ark.

Others, echoing statements similar to the US Surgeon General from early March, said masks could make individuals sicker and exacerbate the spread of the virus.

“Face masks in public places are not necessary, based on all the current evidence,” said Coen Berends, spokesman for the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment. “There is no benefit and there may even be negative impact.”

In Sweden, where COVID-19 deaths have slowed to a crawl, public health officials say they see “no point” in requiring individuals to wear masks.

“With numbers diminishing very quickly in Sweden, we see no point in wearing a face mask in Sweden, not even on public transport,” said Anders Tegnell, Sweden’s top infectious disease expert.

Read full story here…

AAPS: FDA Delays On HCQ Outpatient Approval Are Causing Deaths Daily

The venerable Association of American Physicians and Surgeons is calling on the FDA to immediately release HCQ for outpatient treatment to save thousands of needless deaths from COVID-19. The FDA’s blatant hypocrisy in failing to do sos should outrage all Americans. ⁃ TN Editor

20,000 more Americans have died while the FDA has delayed since July 1 a new emergency use approval for outpatient use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for COVID-19.

On July, 1 Henry Ford Hospital physicians and researchers in Detroit filed an urgent request to FDA Commissioner Dr. Stephen Hahn for a new outpatient Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for FDA approval of HCQ to be used in early treatment for COVID-19. Baylor Scott & White Heart and Vascular Institute in Dallas, issued an urgent appeal supporting the Henry Ford EUA application, based on their clinical study of prophylactic use of HCQ in their own medical workers. Baylor cardiologists emphasized there were no adverse cardiac outcomes in their own or the Ford study.

Henry Ford’s new clinical trial found an impressive 51% reduction in deaths if HCQ was begun within 24 hours of admission to hospital. An outpatient primary care study by Dr. Vladimir Zelenko, using HCQ, azithromycin and zinc given within less than 7 days of COVID-19 symptoms, showed approximately 80% decrease in deaths, and less than 1% of his patients needed to be admitted to hospital. These U.S. early intervention studies extraordinary results show how many lives can be saved with early HCQ treatment.

If the FDA had acted quickly on the Henry Ford and Baylor approval request for HCQ, we can reasonably consider that 16,000 lives could have been saved since July 1.

EUA applications do not have to take long to approve, when well documented rationale and supporting research is presented as Henry Ford team and Baylor cardiologists did.

HCQ is already an FDA-approved drug, unlike remdesivir, which had almost an immediate compassionate use authorization granted that has now been expanded for early use despite severe side effects. The former director of the FDA subagency BARDA, Rick Bright, Ph.D., submitted an EUA for HCQ approval for hospital use at 11:30 pm on March 28, 2020. Dr. Hahn’s approval was granted a little after midnight, March 29, 2020. Approval in about 30 minutes.

We have been waiting almost 30 days for Dr. Hahn to issue approval of the Henry Ford EUA application for outpatient use. Dr. Hahn has stated that we need more data. Henry Ford and Baylor doctors have already provided research documentation stronger than in Rick Bright’s March application, and included current COVID-19 studies from the U.S. and other countries.What amount of “data” will ever satisfy Dr. Hahn?

Let THIS sink in: Laboratory studies published by the National Institutes of Health 15 years ago (2005) showed potent antiviral effects of chloroquine against SARS-CoV-1 to block the infection at the earliest stage. Anthony Fauci, who was working at NIH at that time, has to have known for the last 15-18 years that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are effective against SARS-Co-V-1, which shares 79% of the viral genome with SARS-CoV-2, the cause of COVID-19 disease.

It is appalling that so many more Americans have died, while the physician who is head of the FDA has dawdled on approving HCQ for an urgent new use in this pandemic. Dr. Hahn knows full well the 65-year track record of safety worldwide in patients of all ages, all ethnic groups, and even pregnant women and nursing mothers.

Doctors who are treating COVID-19 patients see lives being saved by cheap, safe, FDA-approved medicines—hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, doxycycline.

It is crucial to start HCQ early, during days 1-7 of symptoms, for these key reasons:

  • Early treatment is when HCQ works best two ways: to stop viral entry into our cells, and block the virus from multiplying using the cell’s machinery.
  • The viral load explodes by day 6, and then can trigger an exaggerated inflammatory response called Cytokine Storm, which severely damages critical organs: lungs, kidneys, heart, brain, liver and intestines. This severe complication doesn’t occur in all COVID-19 patients, but often is fatal when it does.
  • Early treatment keeps infected people from spreading the virus to others.
  • Early treatment is crucial to keep people out of hospitals and off ventilators.
  • Availability of early treatment is urgently needed to safely re-open businesses, schools, and churches, and help relieve public anxiety and fear.

Front-line doctors have been pleading with the FDA and State officials since March to open access to early treatment with HCQ. The supply of HCQ has been ramped up to handle its use in early treatment of COVID. The Strategic National Stockpile has millions of doses deteriorating in government warehouses that are not being distributed because doctors are prevented from prescribing for outpatients with COVID-19. FDA’s misleading statements about HCQ have led to dangerous, unprecedented restrictions on physicians’ off-label prescribing rights imposed by state governors, medical boards and pharmacy boards.

Generic HCQ with azithromycin or doxycycline plus zinc is taken by mouth.Total treatment cost is about $25-$30 cash price for the 5-7 day course used in COVID-19.

Remdesivir must be given intravenously to patients in hospital, at a cost of about $3,500. Its serious side effects include respiratory failure, the very condition it is supposed to treat. It has shown limited success: it shortened hospital stays by only 4 days and has not been clearly shown to reduce deaths.

Baylor’s study showing prophylactic benefits for hospital workers is profoundly important, not only for front-line medical workers, but also for law enforcement officers, paramedics, clergy, dentists/dental hygienists, truck drivers, food-processing workers, teachers, behavioral health professionals, factory and grocery store workers, flight attendants, and many others.

HCQ is a safe, effective outpatient treatment we have NOW. Physicians and patients need freedom to use it. Delays waiting for the “magic bullet” of a vaccine inevitably mean more deaths. Even IF we have a vaccine that works, we still need therapeutics, such as HCQ.

Testing is inaccurate and often unavailable, and HCQ dispensing must not be limited to persons with a positive test. Such limits also prevent prophylactic use. Governors and other officials must not be allowed to arbitrarily restrict life-saving HCQ treatment.

Continued shutdowns of businesses, schools, churches, and mandatory mask edicts are not controlling the epidemic. Meanwhile, these orders have eroded our constitutional freedoms, and devastated our economic, psychological, physical, and spiritual well-being.

Dr. Hahn’s FDA is costing more lives with its delay in removing the obstructions it created to prescribing safe, effective early HCQ treatment: deaths directly from COVID-19 and indirectly by destroying livelihoods and distributions of foods, goods and services required to sustain our lives.

Dr. Hahn, America needs you to act NOW.

Read full story here…

Bill Gates: From Bioethics To Eugenics

Bill Gates is not the only Technocrat who believes in eugenics, but he is certainly the figurehead. Social engineering, death panels, population reduction, vaccinations, etc., all play into a world of other people deciding your fate on planet earth. Gates has the entire medical industry panting after his loopy ideology. ⁃ TN Editor

One of the iconic moments from my Who Is Bill Gates? documentary is the clip of Gates at the 2010 Aspen Ideas Festival discussing a proposal to increase funding for public education by diverting money from end-of-life care for the elderly and terminally ill.

Lamenting the skyrocketing tuition rates for college students, Gates tells the Aspen Institute’s Walter Isaacson that, “That’s a trade-off society’s making because of very, very high medical costs and a lack of willingness to say, you know, ‘Is spending a million dollars on that last three months of life for that patient—would it be better not to lay off those 10 teachers and to make that trade off in medical cost?’

Then, squirming around in his seat and looking over at the audience, Gates acknowledges that there may be some objection to this line of thinking: “But that’s called the ‘death panel’ and you’re not supposed to have that discussion.”

A decade ago, when Gates made those remarks, it would be difficult to imagine an idea that was more out of touch with general public sentiment than the idea of “death panels” to free up money to hire more teachers. It was shocking enough to the general public that even the socially inept Gates realized that talking about it was verboten.

But what many sitting in the festival audience that day may not have realized is that the idea of trading health care for the elderly for public education funds is not Gates’ own novel proposal. In fact, this “death panel” discussion has been around for a long time and that discussion was spearheaded by a relatively obscure—but incredibly influential—branch of philosophy known as bioethics.

Bioethics, for those not in the know, concerns itself with the ethical questions raised by advancing knowledge and technological sophistication in biology, medicine, and the life sciences. This often leads to serious academic debates about subjects that seem like bizarre, improbable, science fiction-like scenarios involving the ethics of using memory-enhancing drugs or erasing memories altogether.

While the musings of bioethicists on the case for killing granny and after-birth abortions and other morally outrageous ideas may still seem a little “out there” to much of the public, conversations about these previously unspeakable topics are going to become much more commonplace as we enter the COVID-1984 biosecurity paradigm.

In fact, they already are.

Case in point: In my recent conversation with Canadian journalist Rosemary Frei, she drew attention to a paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine in March of this year. The paper, “Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19,” was written by a team of prominent bioethicists and discusses “the need to ration medical equipment and interventions” during a pandemic emergency.

Their recommendations include removing treatment from patients who are elderly and/or less likely to survive, as these people divert scarce medical resources from younger patients or those with a more promising prognosis. Although the authors refrain from using the term, the necessity of setting up a death panel to determine who should or should not receive treatment is implicit in the proposal itself.

In normal times, this would have been just another scholarly discussion of a theoretical situation. But these are not normal times. Instead, the paper quickly went from abstract proposal to concrete reality. As Frei noted in her own article on how the high death rates at care homes in Ontario were created on purpose, the Canadian Medial Association (CMA) simply adopted the recommendations laid out in that New England Journal of Medicine article, abandoning its usual practice of deliberating on major changes to policy over a months-long consultation process because “[t]he current situation, unfortunately, did not allow for such a process.”

Lest there be any question about whether these policies are currently being put into practice, one needs simply observe the conversation that is taking place in Texas right now regarding how to deal with the supposed “surge” in COVID hospitalizations. As The Guardian puts it: “Texas hospital forced to set up ‘death panel’ as Covid-19 cases surge.”

It doesn’t matter that the hospitals are not actually full in Houston. It doesn’t matter that the concern over the flood of hospitalizations in Texas is based on statistical trickery and outright lies. In fact, that’s kind of the point. By scaring the public with horror stories about hospitals on the verge of collapse, the combined weight of the government, the media, and the medical establishment have managed to do in just a few months what Gates and his cronies have been unable to do in the past decade: Introduce the verboten “death panel” discussion to the general public.

In fact, when you start documenting the history of bioethics, you discover that this is exactly what this field of study is meant to do: To frame the debate about hot button issues so that eugenicist ideals and values can be mainstreamed in society and enacted in law. From abortion to euthanasia, there isn’t a debate in the medical field that wasn’t preceded by some bioethicist or bioethics institute preparing the public for a massive change in mores, morays, values and laws.

The research into the history of bioethics leads one to the doorstep of the Hastings Center, a nonprofit research center that, according to its website, “was important in establishing the field of bioethics.” The founding director of the Hastings Center, Theodosius Dobzhansky, was a chairman of the American Eugenics Society from 1964 to 1973, while Hastings cofounder Daniel Callahan—who has admitted to relying on Rockefeller Population Council and UN Population Fund money in the early days of the center’s work—served as a director of the American Eugenics Society (rebranded as The Society for the Study of Social Biology) from 1987 to 1992.

Read full story here…

Yale Professor: Hydroxychloroquine Is ‘the Key to Defeating COVID-19’

The modus operandi of technocrat “debate” over Hydroxychloroquine mirrors that of hysterical climate change. Shame, ridicule and marginalize real scientists who attempt to bring the truth to light and call pseudo-science real science.

The suppression of Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine has cost America tens of thousands of needless deaths and yet the Technocrats behind it will never be held accountable. ⁃ TN Editor

Harvey Risch, professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, says that hydroxychloroquine is “the key to defeating COVID-19” in a Newsweek op-ed published this past week.

“I am usually accustomed to advocating for positions within the mainstream of medicine, so have been flummoxed to find that, in the midst of a crisis, I am fighting for a treatment that the data fully support but which, for reasons having nothing to do with a correct understanding of the science, has been pushed to the sidelines,” Risch wrote. “As a result, tens of thousands of patients with COVID-19 are dying unnecessarily. Fortunately, the situation can be reversed easily and quickly.”

And it can be reversed by the same medication that has become unnecessarily politicized by the media and the Democratic Party over the past several months.

“When this inexpensive oral medication is given very early in the course of illness, before the virus has had time to multiply beyond control, it has shown to be highly effective,” Risch explained. “Especially when given in combination with the antibiotics azithromycin or doxycycline and the nutritional supplement zinc.”

Earlier this month, a large peer-reviewed study found that hydroxychloroquine cut the mortality rate of COVID-19 by more than half and, contrary to previous claims by faulty studies, had no adverse effects on the heart.

For months the media has ignored both scientific and anecdotal evidence of the drug’s efficacy in treating COVID-19.

The war on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine began almost immediately after Trump touted it as a potential gamechanger in the fight against the disease. Trump was accused of “practicing medicine without a license” simply for pointing out that the drug showed promise in some small studies. The New York Times even alleged that Trump’s motivation for touting the drug was self-serving because he holds “a small personal financial interest” in Sanofi, even though the drug is out of patent (any pharmaceutical company can manufacture it) and he only owned $29 – $435 in stock as part of a mutual fund.

Because the media and the Democratic Party wanted to use the pandemic to thwart Trump’s reelection, any positive news had to be buried. Trump was accused of offering false hope and “selling snake oil” to the public. A Democratic state lawmaker in Ohio even said Trump should be tried for “crimes against humanity” for touting the drug.

The media gave lots of coverage to studies that associated hydroxychloroquine with a higher mortality rate. In April, the results of a U.S. Veterans Health Administration study on the benefits of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 were released. The study analyzed the impact of hydroxychloroquine with and without the antibiotic azithromycin and compared that to COVID-19 patients receiving standard care. The VA study found there were “more deaths” among those given hydroxychloroquine than those who just received standard care. However, the VA study wasn’t a clinical trial, but a small, non-peer-reviewed study of patients who were not representative of the entire population, and those with more severe COVID-19 cases were disproportionally administered the drug.

The media was so focused on how they could use the pandemic to undermine Trump’s chances of reelection that they rushed to downplay any sign of hope, which may have prevented the drug from being used to save lives. Anti-hydroxychloroquine hysteria by the media made finding volunteers for studies difficult.

Meanwhile, evidence of the drug’s effectiveness was conveniently and repeatedly ignored. The media ignored a survey of doctors back in May that found an overwhelming majority of them “would prescribe hydroxychloroquine or another anti-malaria drug to a family member” suffering from the coronavirus.

Read full story here…

Fauci The Fear-Monger: COVID-19 Is “Worst Nightmare”

A high fear level over COVID-19 is necessary to continue the economic destruction of America and the world, and Fauci delivers. Mandated single vaccines are now morphing into a series of vaccines. Meanwhile, economic infrastructure crumbles. ⁃ TN Editor

The unique characteristics of this pandemic may not allow people to completely eradicate it, but public health measures and good vaccines should bring “very good control,” NIAID director Anthony Fauci said Wednesday.

Driving the news: “We are living, right now, through a historic pandemic outbreak. And, we are, right now, in a situation where we do not see any particular end in sight,” Fauci told a panel hosted by the not-for-profit TB Alliance.

“It’s the perfect storm,” Fauci says. We often talk about outbreaks and pandemics, be they influenza or other pathogens, that have to have a few characteristics that make them particularly formidable. Well, this particular virus has that.”

  • For a public health official, this is “almost your worst nightmare,” Fauci adds.
  • He points out that SARS-CoV-2 jumps species, is a new pathogen with no known innate human immunity, and is a respiratory-borne virus that is “spectacularly efficient” at spreading from human to human and has a “substantial degree of morbidity and mortality, particularly in certain populations of people.”

Plus, “the spectrum of involvement with the same pathogen is very unique,” Fauci says.

  • “I’ve never seen an infection in which you have such a broad range — of literally nothing, namely no symptoms at all, in a substantial proportion of the population; to some who get ill with minor symptoms; to some who get ill enough to be in bed for weeks and have post-viral syndromes; [to] others [who] get hospitalized, require oxygen, intensive care, ventilation and death.”
  • From what doctors can tell right now, Fauci says the pathogenesis of the disease indicates “you want to block the virus and keep the immune systems intact early on. But, you want to block inflammation later on, because that assumes a much greater role.”

What to watch: Several vaccines are in or will soon be entering phase 3 clinical testing, Fauci says. While the FDA gave a 50% efficacy benchmark for the vaccine, “they’re shooting” for a vaccine with 70% or higher effectiveness.

  • One safety concern they’re watching for during phase 3 trials are for possible “vaccine-induced immune enhancement” that can sometimes occur if there’s suboptimal antibodies in a vaccine that actually enhance the infection once you’re exposed later.
  • While there is no “particular reason” to believe this will happen with COVID-19 vaccines, there had been issues before with animals tested with the SARS vaccine, so “we want to pay attention to it.”

Fauci says he’s “cautiously optimistic” a good vaccine will be available soon.

  • “I don’t really see us eradicating it. I think with a combination of good public health measures, a degree of global herd immunity, and a good vaccine … I think we’ll get very good control of this. Whether it’s this year or next year, I’m not certain,” Fauci says.

Read full story here…

Bill Gates: It Will Take Multiple Vaccines To Kick COVID-19

Technocrats are raising the bar on sticking needles into your body, saying that a single vaccine won’t be enough. Rather, you will need multiple doses over a short period of time to deliver immunity. ⁃ TN Editor

Bill Gates has warned that multiple doses of any coronavirus vaccine could be necessary as he slammed Donald Trump’s handling of the pandemic.

Microsoft billionaire Gates said “serious mistakes” have been made by the White House as he predicted schools could be closed until fall 2021.

Speaking during an interview with Norah O’Donnell on CBS News, Gates said he had faith in the development of a coronavirus vaccine.

However, he warned it could take an “unbelievably big number” of doses to beat the virus.

He said: “None of the vaccines at this point appear like they’ll work with a single dose.

“That was the hope at the very beginning.”

However, he said the solution will “improve over time” even though there will be “a lot of uncertainty” about the vaccine.

The philanthropist – who is worth $98billion, the second-richest man in the world – has offered £300million to help fund research into the vaccine.

Gates also described the closures of schools as the “biggest cost” of the pandemic after deaths as he said classes likely won’t be all back until fall 2021.

He said: “This next academic year does hang in the balance. It is extremely important.”

More should be done to help schools take learning online to ensure kids get their educations, he said.

The 64-year-old tech boss now spends most of his times working with the Global Health division of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

He had been warning of the threat posed to humanity by pandemics since 2015 before the coronavirus outbreak.

During the interview, Gates was also heavily critical of the Trump administration – with the US having the highest death and case count in the world with 146,192 and 4.1million.

Gates said: “Some of the policies were a mistake. Opening up bars – the economic benefit versus the infection risk – a lot of policies like that made it a mistake.”

The Microsoft mogul emphasized that social distancing, wearing masks and developing a vaccine are now key in beating Covid-19.

He conceded however some of the “serious mistakes” were made because of a lacking of understanding of the virus.

Read full story here…

Excessive Screen Time For Toddlers Can Stunt Development

When schools are closed, children at home increasingly turn to electronic screens to be entertained. The risk to younger children is well documented as it stunts mental development. Even the WHO recommends only 30 minutes per day of screen time for toddlers. ⁃ TN Editor

As the world continues to advance, technology is becoming a bigger part of every child’s development. Playing on various digital devices for too long, however, can be just as bad for kids as it is for adults. A recent study says excessive screen time may stunt a child’s growth, especially if they start using devices around age two or three.

Researchers in Singapore examined over 500 children. Their findings lead them to recommend parents follow World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines, which advise limiting a child’s screen time to one hour per day. This amount should be even less for children younger than five.

Tracking the many forms of screen time

Study authors say screen time tends to replace time children usually spend sleeping or engaging in physical activity. This can lead to a variety of health problems, including high risk of obesity and lower mental development.

Until this report, researchers say most studies focus on school-aged children and adolescents, producing mixed results.

“We sought to determine whether screen viewing habits at age two to three affected how children spent their time at age five. In particular we were interested in whether screen viewing affected sleep patterns and activity levels later in childhood,” researcher Falk Müller-Riemenschneider explains in a media release.

Parents were asked to report on their children’s screen time at age two and again one year later. Activities like playing video games, watching TV, and using a tablet or phone were all included in the results.

When the children turned five, they continuously wore an activity tracker for seven days. That tracker monitors sleep, time spent sitting, and how much light-to-strenuous physical activity the youngsters get.

Read full story here…

Yale Professor: Hydroxychloroquine Could Save 100,000 Lives If Widely Deployed

The Technocrat-induced propaganda war against the use of the drug hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 has cost tens of thousands of needless deaths. HCQ has treated tens of millions of people over 65 years with few side effects, and is dirt cheap. ⁃ TN Editor

Yale epidemiology professor Dr. Harvey Risch told Fox News‘s “Ingraham Angle” that he thinks hydroxychloroquine could save 75,000 to 100,000 lives if widely used to treat COVID-19, and that it’s unfortunate that a “propaganda war” has been waged on the commonly prescribed drug which is not based on “medical facts.”

“There are many doctors that I’ve gotten hostile remarks about saying that all the evidence is bad for it and, in fact, that is not true at all,” Risch said on Monday, adding that he believes the drug should be used as a prophylactic for front-line healthcare workers, as has been done in India.

Researchers at the Henry Ford Health System in Southeast Michigan have found that early administration of hydroxychloroquine makes hospitalized patients substantially less likely to die.

The study, published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, determined that hydroxychloroquine provided a “66 percent hazard ratio reduction,” and hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin a 71 percent reduction, compared with neither treatment.

In-hospital mortality was 18.1 percent overall; 13.5 percent with just hydroxychloroquine, 22.4 percent with azithromycin alone, and 26.4 percent with neither drug. “Prospective trials are needed” for further review, the researchers note, even as they concluded: “In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19 risk factors, treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with reduction in COVID-19 associated mortality.” –Fox News

All the evidence is actually good for it when it is used in outpatient uses. Nevertheless, the only people who actually say that are a whole pile of doctors who are on the front lines treating those patients across the country and they are the ones who are at risk being forced not to do it,” Risch added, arguing that the MSM refuses to cover the benefits of the drug, and is actively silencing those trying to address the efficacy of HCQ.

Imagine how many people have died thanks to the media’s ‘propaganda war.’

Read full story here…